- Статьи
- Economy
- A hitch in favor of the yuan: a new cryptocurrency crisis has emerged in the United States
A hitch in favor of the yuan: a new cryptocurrency crisis has emerged in the United States
The hopes of the crypto industry for the rapid and final formation of the legal framework in the United States turned out to be too rosy. The CLARITY Act ("Digital Asset Market Transparency Act") bill, which was supposed to put an end to years of disputes over the powers of regulators, unexpectedly stalled in the Senate Banking Committee in January. The delay in the hearings, originally scheduled for mid-January, revealed a split between lawmakers and within the financial sector itself. Lobbying banks for their interests may lead to additional damage to the dollar, which will be in a worse position compared to the yuan: China has already completed the relevant reforms. Details of the new "crypt" crisis can be found in the Izvestia article.
Trump and Stablecoins
The administration of Donald Trump, which declared a course towards the "cryptodominationalization" of the United States, faced resistance from traditional banks, who saw the new rules as a threat to their fundamental business model in the issue of interest payments on stablecoins.
Stablecoins are a special type of cryptocurrency, the value of which is rigidly linked to the fiat currency (in 90% of cases, to the US dollar). Functionally, stablecoins solve the main problem of the crypto market — volatility. They serve as a "safe haven" for traders and, more importantly, an effective settlement tool. Transfers in stablecoins are carried out quickly and with minimal fees, which makes them a serious competitor to the SWIFT system and traditional interbank transfers. By 2026, the volume of the stablecoin market has reached about $300 billion. They have transformed from a niche product for enthusiasts into a systemically important segment that provides liquidity to the entire digital economy.
The first year of Donald Trump's second term was marked by the active promotion of crypto legislation. Last summer, the House of Representatives passed a package of acts called the "Crypto Week." The most important of these was the GENIUS Act, which established strict requirements for securing stablecoins: every digital dollar must be backed by a real cash deposit or short-term US Treasury bills.
The CLARITY Act was supposed to be the next, final step. The 300-page document aims to clearly delineate the spheres of influence between the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). The bill was supposed to replace the chaotic practice of "regulation through lawsuits" with clear legislative standards for exchanges, DeFi protocols, and software developers.
However, on January 14, 2026, the largest American crypto exchange, Coinbase, represented by its head, Brian Armstrong, withdrew support for the bill. It was followed by a pause in the Senate. The reason was the wording, which, according to the industry, makes the law "worse than its absence."
The battle for the percentage
The main stumbling block was the issue of stablecoin rewards. To understand the essence of the conflict, you need to look at the mechanics of profit. Issuers of stablecoins (such as Circle or Tether) hold reserves in US Treasury bills, which bring in about 3.6% per annum at the beginning of 2026. Traditional banks operate according to a similar scheme: they accept funds to current accounts (non-term deposits) at 0.1% and invest them in the same promissory notes or loans, taking the difference for themselves.
However, crypto companies have started returning a portion of this return (about 3.5%) to their users in the form of rewards. For consumers, stablecoin has become an ideal checking account: as liquid as money in a bank, but generating real income.
The American Bankers Association (ABA) has launched a lobbying campaign against this practice. The logic of banks is simple: if stablecoins officially generate 3.5% of income, there will be a massive exodus of deposits from traditional banks, especially regional ones. This will undermine the banks' ability to issue loans and, according to them, destabilize the economy. The banking lobby is demanding that the CLARITY Act enshrine a ban on the payment of rewards on stablecoins, effectively forcing the crypto industry to work with zero returns for customers. In fact, banks require the government to legislatively protect their profits from more efficient technological competitors.
The "narrow bank" and the problem of regulatory arbitration
The term "narrow bank" often comes up in discussions in Washington. This is a financial institution that does not issue loans, but simply "parks" clients' money in ultra-reliable government bonds. Issuers of stablecoins are typical "narrow banks". They are safer than traditional banks, as they do not take on credit risks and do not have a gap in the maturities of assets and liabilities.
US regulators have traditionally been hostile to "narrow banks", believing that in times of crisis people will take money from ordinary banks and transfer it to "narrow" ones, which will accelerate the collapse of the banking system. This is the argument that opponents of the new law are currently using. However, defenders of the law point to the selectivity of this approach: money market funds are allowed to pay interest on government bonds, while stablecoins are not, meaning this can be interpreted as regulatory favoritism.
The digital yuan has crept in unnoticed
Meanwhile, Beijing is taking steps that could change the global currency market. Since the beginning of 2026, the People's Bank of China has allowed its banks to charge interest on digital yuan balances. China is deliberately making its digital currency more liberal and attractive for international ownership. If the digital yuan generates income and provides instant payments, and the digital dollar (via stablecoins) is artificially limited in profitability due to lobbying by American bankers, global investors will have something to think about.
The protectionism of American banks, which are trying to preserve revenues by banning innovation, creates the risk of a "regulatory backlog" in the United States. With China aggressively promoting its digital asset technologies in Asia and Africa, Washington's attempts to restrict stablecoins look like working against its own long-term interests.
At the moment, CLARITY Act is in the "freeze" mode. Tim Scott, chairman of the Banking Committee, calls this a "brief pause," but the reality is that without consensus from major industry players such as Coinbase, the law will not pass. For investors, this means maintaining the status quo: regulation through lawsuits will remain the main tool of the SEC, and uncertainty will continue to put pressure on quotes.
We can say that there is a clash of two eras, says Diana Golovanova, an expert at the Economic Policy Foundation.
— The conflict over the payment of income on stablecoins in the United States, in fact, reflects the dispute between the developing crypto industry and the traditional banking system. As soon as stablecoins begin to bring income to its holder, they cease to be just a means of payment and turn into an alternative to bank deposits. This creates a risk of an outflow of funds from banks, which, according to experts, could reach 6.6 trillion US dollars, which explains the resistance from banks," concluded Golovanova.
The outcome of this confrontation will determine not only the future of cryptocurrencies in the United States, but also the dollar's position as the world's main digital currency in competition with Beijing. In the meantime, lobbying is winning in Washington, but things have not gone well with "regulatory clarity."
What's in Russia?
The development of this market sector is still in its initial stage. According to Golovanova, in Russia, stablecoins have not yet been allocated to a separate legal category and do not have their own regulatory regime. At the end of 2025, the Central Bank announced plans to further develop regulation of the crypto market, but it is not yet known about special regulation of stablecoins.
"State—owned digital money (digital ruble) is currently being actively developed by the Bank of Russia, and the regulator's attitude towards private digital money is rather negative," says Nikolai Dudchenko, analyst at Finam Financial Group. — In particular, the same report emphasizes that cryptocurrencies have the characteristics of financial pyramids, and their price growth is supported by speculative demand from new entrants to the market. We believe that the probability of the appearance of stablecoins in Russia, by analogy with the possibility of issuing such coins under the recently adopted GENIUS Act in the United States, is extremely unlikely.
Переведено сервисом «Яндекс Переводчик»
